Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • shrutimish@gmail.com
    Member
    • Dec 2012
    • 12

    #46
    The bioinformatic person is doing all that. She trimmed the adapters and tried aligning the reads to the genome using tophat. She got 40% alignment there. We tried blasting some of the unaligned reads and realized that something went wrong with the tophat run as some of them were aligning to chromosome M, chr 1, 4 etc. She will be doing the alignment again with STAR this time but to save on time she also ran the RSEM along side and got these low percentage alignments to transcriptome so I wanted to know if we are missing out on anything?

    Comment

    • Brian Bushnell
      Super Moderator
      • Jan 2014
      • 2709

      #47
      It would be helpful if you posted some basic quality metrics, such as you get from FastQC. There's not enough information to determine what the problem is or even if there is a problem.

      Comment

      • shrutimish@gmail.com
        Member
        • Dec 2012
        • 12

        #48
        Ok. I have looked at the FastQC report of the samples and it looks fine to me. What kind of information should I give from FastQC report?

        Comment

        • Brian Bushnell
          Super Moderator
          • Jan 2014
          • 2709

          #49
          The whole thing as PDF is good way to start. But particularly the quality histograms, anything that failed the tests, and anything related to mapping. And the stats from adapter trimming, the command lines you used for each program, the top hits and mapping rate you got from Blast... etc.

          Comment

          • shrutimish@gmail.com
            Member
            • Dec 2012
            • 12

            #50
            I will have to ask my bioinformatician for the stats after adapter trimming. I will get back on this. Thanks for your time.

            Comment

            Latest Articles

            Collapse

            • GATTACAT
              Reply to Nine Things a Sample Prep Scientist Thinks About Before Sequencing
              by GATTACAT
              Love this - good data definitely starts from good input, and poor input can only give relatively poor data. I particularly like the mention of Nanodrop/absorbance based methods for quantification. It's such a toss up if you'll get an accurate reading or what amounts to a randomly generated number, and a lot of library/sequencing related issues can be traced back to poor quant.
              07-01-2026, 11:43 AM
            • SEQadmin2
              Nine Things a Sample Prep Scientist Thinks About Before Sequencing
              by SEQadmin2


              I’m not a sequencing expert. I’m a purification scientist who uses NGS to evaluate workflows my group develops. With this perspective, we think about the sample first and the NGS workflow second. The sequencer is an exceptionally honest reporter, but it can only report on what you give it, so whether you get clean, interpretable data from an NGS workflow is largely determined before you begin.

              Here are nine questions we think about, in roughly the order they matter, before...
              06-18-2026, 07:11 AM

            ad_right_rmr

            Collapse

            News

            Collapse

            Topics Statistics Last Post
            Started by SEQadmin2, Yesterday, 11:08 AM
            0 responses
            7 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Started by SEQadmin2, 06-30-2026, 05:37 AM
            0 responses
            11 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Started by SEQadmin2, 06-26-2026, 11:10 AM
            0 responses
            19 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Started by SEQadmin2, 06-17-2026, 06:09 AM
            0 responses
            53 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Working...